Reported / Citable
Background
In this miscellaneous action, Jody Cruz and other parties sought relief concerning a subpoena duces tecum issued to nonparty Fertility Specialists of Texas. The defendant moved to quash the subpoena or, alternatively, for a protective order.
The matter was referred to a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636. On July 22, 2026, the magistrate judge recommended denying both the motion to quash or for a protective order and the defendant’s request to strike a notice of supplemental authority. No timely objections were filed.
The Court’s Holding
District Judge Sean D. Jordan adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation in full, concluding that its findings and conclusions were correct. The court denied the defendant’s motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum to Fertility Specialists of Texas or, alternatively, for a protective order.
The court also denied the defendant’s request to strike the plaintiff’s notice of supplemental authority. Any relief not previously granted was denied as moot, and the clerk was directed to close the matter.
Key Takeaways
- The subpoena-directed motion to quash or for a protective order was denied.
- The court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation after no timely objections were filed.
- The request to strike supplemental authority was also denied, and the miscellaneous matter was closed.
Why It Matters
The order leaves the subpoena to the nonparty fertility clinic in place. It also illustrates the practical consequence of not timely objecting to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation: the district court may adopt it as the court’s findings and conclusions.